There have been some studies looking at how much it costs to clean up vs. how much it costs to prevent pollution. It is much more efficient to prevent pollution than to clean up. Cleaning up polluted areas is a tough thing to direct funds to because it is less expensive to buy land and start building there. Also, the laws are not strict enough to make companies and industries responsible for paying for clean up. Putting more money into preventing pollution would be more effective, but there should be some way to develop a funding program to put money into cleaning up.
Yes, but not only should we be cleaning the pollution we spread, we should be spending more money on how to prevent it in the future. Cleaning it isn’t enough, because it will be bound to happen again. Coal burning power plants for example pollute the air. We could simply try and remove the CO2 from the air, or we could spend those dollars on implementing clean energy, so it does not continue. I believe that if more energy, time, and money is spent on preventing the pollution it will be more effective and worthwhile.
I totally agree. It seems the planet is pretty good at healing itself when we’re able to give it a chance. (Example: the hole in the ozone layer.)
But the key to giving the planet a chance to heal is to stop additional damage– which is exactly what you propose.
Click here to cancel reply.
Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!
Don't have an account? Click Here to Signup
© Copyright GreenAnswers.com LLC